Transcript

OK, so welcome to this meeting. My name is Councillor White and I am the Chair of the Housing Overview and Scrutiny Committee. So members of the committee, I will now call on your names in alphabetical order. Please switch on your microphone to confirm your attendance. So Councillor Austin. Councillor Hayes? Here. Councillor Hayes? Here. Councillor Goshen might be late or he's not going to be here. He's not going to be here. Right. OK. Councillor McLeod? Here. Councillor Rigby? Here. Councillor Tiller? Here. Councillor Varifaraj? Here. And so we've had apologies now from councillors, Mrs. Graham Govindia and Councillor Goshen as well. I would like to welcome councillor Richard Jones as leader of the opposition who will be joining the committee in its discussions this evening under standing order 66A. I would also like to welcome councillor. I would also like to welcome councillor Dickerdom as the cabinet member for housing and Mr. Thomas Glockner as the newly elected vice chair of the Borough Residents Forum. Congratulations and welcome, Mr. Glockner and Mrs. Marlene Price, the outgoing vice chair of the BRF and Marlene's been a member of the BRF for 40 years and been vice chair for around about 25 years, I think, or 23 at least. Yeah. And so I think it would be a miss if we didn't mention a few things about Marlene, who has been such a stalwart of the committee. She's also a member of Arch and has also been part of tenant government, tenant groups and government, various government committees, and also within the council as well, various focus groups that she's been a part of and has been really, really helpful for us. And I think since I've been chair of housing, it's been a pleasure to have her on this committee. And I'm not just, I'm not saying you've got a hard act to follow, but I think I just said that. But this will be her last meeting and I think you wouldn't go and miss if we all give Marlene a round of applause for her commitment. And I think Mr. Werth, as the head of housing, has got a couple of things to say or possibly do. Yes, just to echo the chairman's comments and to, on behalf of the officers, thank you. I've been here. I know, I know, but we're thanking you for your service in this role, not because you're stepping back from the work you do in those many other roles you perform. So on behalf of the officers, just to thank you and echo those words. We have got you a small gift to mark the occasion and, yeah, thank you so much. Thank you so much, Marlene. Well done. Am I allowed to give a reply? You will be, but you mentioned I'm not going anywhere, but you'll have to go and get a vase at least. So, yeah, it could help me, yeah. Can't be for the members if you want to pass the bottle round. No, no, no. Did you want to say a few things? Thank you. Sorry, I apologize. I need to remember that now. It's the last time, isn't it? Thank you to councillors Govinda and Dickinson, Dick Den, sorry, which is Ravia and Aydin to me for your very kind email messages. Thank you, Morris. Thank you very much for your message tonight. Thank you to all for your good news. As I've said to BRF, I will continue to be diligent for the benefit of all the residents. I've made good relationships over the years and rest assured, if I need to, I will continue to be the pain in their bum, talking to the officers. Next month will be 40 years since I attended my 40 BRF meeting in its many different names, and in those early years, wow, there were some of those meetings were difficult. I must have been doing something right as the residents felt assured to continue to elect me and look after their interests. Before I present any of the papers, I'd like to congratulate Tom and Thomas. I'll be official now. Can I? In taking over the baton, Thomas is pretty new to RA matters, and he's asked me to assist him, which I will do. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, so if I've wiped a tear from my eye, I will carry on the meeting. So we also have a number of officers present who will introduce themselves when they address the committee. So the first matter is the minutes from the 28th of November. Are there any objections to confirming the previous meeting of the 28th of November as a correct record? Yep. Okay with that. Good. Okay. And so next item is declarations of interest. I will start by saying I'm a member of Community Renewable Energy Wandsworth, which is crew, and they are involved with the council at various levels around community energy, but I draw no financial benefit from being involved. Anybody else? So Matthew? Sorry, Councillor Tiller. I'm a council tenant. Okay. Councillor McLeod? Yeah, I'm a council tenant also. And Councillor Oslo? Just to make everybody aware that I, in one of the papers this evening, that I run a company that operates the lettings and sales business within the borough. Councillor Dickard? I'm a member of the London Renters' Union, which is relevant to the licensing scheme paper. And Mr Price? Thank you, just to let you know that I am a leaseholder on the Winstown, New York Road estate, which I will be giving a little talk on behalf of the residents. Thank you. Okay, thank you very much. Okay, so the next item is, so Marlene's very much dominating this meeting so far, and she's continued to do so. We're on to the borough residence forum, and would you like to say, make a few comments on that, Marlene? Thank you, Chair. All that I will say is that we reviewed the rent-setting paper, and we are happy with the contents. However, I'd like to draw members' attention to paragraph 3 of our Borough Residence Forum paper, and particularly the comments made on bottom of page 2, paragraphs 4, and paragraphs 5 and 6 on the top of the following pages. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Chair. The repairs and maintenance, which is normally picked up by the heating and, sorry, picked up by HRA for the other two blocks that I mentioned, and I know, Tom, you're going to say something. The other two blocks that I've mentioned, the residents, the tenants are picking up the charges rather than yet going to the HRA. So, yes, in relation to Mitchell House and Shuttleworth Road, it's a type I won in the appendix of the report. So, the tenants in those blocks aren't being charged for the repair and maintenance element of the heating and hot water charges. So, we'll obviously make sure that's amended, and apologies, and thank you for spotting that. So, Tom, can you introduce yourself? Oh, sorry, yes, I'm Tom Crawley. I'm Assistant Director of Residence and Estate Services. And in relation to whether those on metering and billing benefit from the hedging, yes, they do, because it's all procured in the same way through the laser contract. So, they would benefit from the same changes as other residents on a communal supply would do. And we do ensure that those residents that are going on to the meeting, I'm talking about the elderly, we know of that 80-year-old who wouldn't put on the heating. Of course. We've had some really severe weather. Thank you. So, the way it works is the sort of billing is monitored, and the financial inclusion team are then basically referred cases where there appears to be issues with the payments on those accounts. And then they will then intervene, and so will the tenancy support team, if needed. So, there is that support there. And also, there's the potential to make kind of emergency sort of cover, basically, so people won't get cut off, you know, if there's exceptional circumstances. So, there's lots of support there, in addition to everything, obviously, the council's doing in terms of warm packs and, you know, the cost of living spend as well. If any of the members have any questions, I'm happy to answer. Thank you. Mr. Glockner, would you, have you got any comments to make at all? You look really surprised when I look at you. I actually don't, but for this evening, Ms. Price is going to take the lead, so I'm just going to sit back and observe. No worries. Okay. So, we are happy to note this report for information. Brilliant. Okay. So, on to item four, which is the Orton Renewal Plan. And we have officers Richardson, Singleton, and more. Much more. Yeah, just to introduce ourselves. My name is Joe Richardson. I'm the Interim Director of Development and Place Delivery. Good evening. I'm Anna Singleton. I'm Head of Regeneration for the Orton. So, yeah, thanks, Mr. Chair. We'll just do a brief introduction and highlight a couple of the salient points from the paper. As you see, the paper is an update on the Orton Renewal Plan, including progress on a range of different work streams, which, and I will, as I say, highlight a few salient points on those in a moment. We're asking for approval to let the main works contract for the Orton Activity Center upgrades and downfield upgrades there. So, great to see some progress there moving forward. And, as I say, with that will be a requirement for the general fund budget variation for the same. So, but, yeah, I'll hand over to Anna to bring a few of the work streams to light for what we're up to these days. Thank you, Jay. So, this is really just to highlight some of the key areas that have been delivered since the Orton Renewal Plan was launched back in June. There's, as per paragraph 11 of the report, there's sort of four major projects that have so far been delivered. The Rahampton Family Hub, situated at 166 Rahampton Lane, which is bringing together a variety of family and children's services sort of within one venue and is already making a really huge impact, positive impact, on hundreds of families in the Rahampton area. There was also two new bus services that have been delivered directly benefiting residents of the Orton, but also the wider Rahampton area. A collaboration with the Rahampton University that has a bus service that operates between Asda in Putney Vale and Putney Bridge Station. The council has negotiated with the university for that now to be available for public use as well. And I do have some statistics that have come through, sort of hot off the press, that since the start of that service, which was in September of 24, there are now over 46,000 additional trips that have been made on that bus since this time last year, which works out at approximately 604 extra passengers per day using that service compared to last year when it wasn't available to the public. So a huge uptick in passengers, and that will obviously predominantly be people that live in that area, on that route, directly connecting them to places that they need to go. The council has also, in collaboration with Onesworth Community Transport, launched a sort of minibus service that operates throughout the estate. It operates between the Alton Estate and Tooting Market and St George's Hospital on a Monday, and it goes directly to Asda and around the Rahampton area on Tuesdays. They also have a programme of sort of outings that can take people further afield, sort of to areas of interest, garden centres, that sort of thing. Don't have any direct statistics on the numbers, but it's certainly been incredibly well received and being well used by residents. And then the WARMPACS, which obviously is a borough-wide initiative, but there was a specific launch of that in Roehampton Library on the 27th of November, recognising the significant proportion of residents on the Alton Estate who are sort of, you know, fit into the more vulnerable category and for whom the WARMPACS is making a really significant difference. If you look at paragraph 12 of the report, this outlines in much, much more detail kind of where we're up to with progressing some of the other elements across a variety of different work streams. But I would just highlight your attention to a couple of the notable things that are being delivered. The Phase 1 of the maintenance works to estate carriageways and footways is now complete. So that is the areas of carriageway and footways that were identified as being in the poorest condition have now all been fixed. So we are moving on to Phase 2, and that is progressing. And also the completion of the housing development of Frontley Way, now known as Gerrard House. That's 14 new council homes completed and all tenants moved in in October 2024. Just to close off our introduction today, just to note that HCA Architects were appointed in August 2024. They're making some – they've had some great consultation events today, and we've had some super feedback, which is helping to shape those proposals and move the award. And, of course, we will report back with further updates to committee during the year ahead. Excellent. The transport part of that was really exciting, given that Roehampton is very isolated, really, very down there. So that's fantastic news. Okay. Any questions on this paper? Yep. Thank you very much, Chair. On paragraph – I'll do two together because they shouldn't be too long. On paragraph 13 and then on paragraph 19, paragraph 13 said, Residence feedback suggests that projects have been well received to date. Has there been a survey carried out to support that, or was it just from conversations and chatting? And if there has been a survey, can we see it? And on number 19 said, a provisional program has been put together, which will allow for a residence ballot. Can we see sight of the provisional program as well? Thank you. So in terms of the feedback across the wider ARP program, it's largely verbal feedback at this stage. As the paragraph there highlights, we're in the process of setting up a more formal monitoring process, and that will form part of a future update that will come back here, which will set out and explain exactly how that will work, so that we do have a much clearer idea of measurables of how well these programs are being delivered and being received. Yeah, in terms of the program leading up to the ballot, yeah, I mean, we'll happily circulate that. It's just milestones of the consultation events running up to that, so we're happy to set them up. Any more questions? Marlene? Thank you, Chair. I am very, very, very, very pleased to hear about the transport facility, the well-used transport facility. Another one of my hats that I wear is on the Battersea Power Station, and as you know, Battersea Power Station is supposed to be using the residents of Wandsworth for any of the work that they can do. They had a concern about the residents from Roehampton not being able to get to the power station because it's a long haul, and they were even considering running a bus so that they can do something. So I'm very pleased to hear this, and I hope that whatever bus that they have, if they get a job at the power station, it connects to something that they can get there, rather than the three buses or whatever it was that they used to use. Thank you very much, and thank you for that. Councillor Dickardim. Yeah, I was just going to say, to flag it for the committee, that there are going to be workshops over the next couple of weeks. Maybe, Anna, you could remind me of the dates because I haven't got them with me, but these are going to be workshops where HGA starts to showcase some of the proposals, and so councillors on the committee who are interested in the kind of direction and the milestones, it'd be worth dropping them on those. So that's just the kind of for your information. Thanks, Councillor Dickardim. Yes, so a programme of engagement is being drawn up at the moment. The main focus event of that will be Saturday 1st of March, and that will be a sort of a drop-in event that will really cover all areas of the Orton renewal plan. Obviously, there's been a lot of focus so far on the housing strand of this, but we feel it's very important to make sure that all of these projects that are progressing, as you can see, huge things are being delivered here. So the idea there is that all service areas will be represented at a drop-in event. It will be hopefully held at the Family Hub at 166 Roehampton Lane. We're just waiting to confirm on all the details of that, but we'll start publicising that very soon. In addition, there will be a follow-up drop-in event in Roehampton Library the following week. Again, when all those details are absolutely confirmed, we will be publicising that, and that will be much more just focusing on the updated housing proposals. We are additionally sort of meeting with smaller local groups as well, but these are the big events that you might be interested to come along and learn a bit more of the detail of what's going on. Thank you so much. No more questions? Are we happy? Oh, sorry, Councillor Tiller. Not really a question. I just wanted to say briefly, you know, as Roehampton Councillor and resident, that I'm very pleased with where we got to. I didn't dare hope we'd ever get to anything this positive for my board. So thank you to everyone involved and everyone who's got us to the stage we're at, and let's hope things continue to improve for the area. Fantastic. Councillor Austin. Thank you. I've got to do the work of four people this evening. On paragraph 31, this is my last one, and it is promised on this paper, is the cost of works. We've got the activity centre at 2.3 million and the downshare field at 4 million estimate. Because I'm one of the newest to the committee almost, are there any benchmarks for that? And how are the figures stacking up against what you were expecting? Yeah, we benchmarked the budgets. I mean, the budgets were created by our technical consultants and QSs. So these are the numbers that we're expecting. Of course, this will be subject to market testing, but this is the budget we're lined up. So, yeah, we do work with a range of technical consultants, and they're very much informed that estimate. Okay. We're happy to accept recommendations A to C. Yeah. Okay. Fantastic. So, next paper is the Winstanley York Road update, and that is Mr. Richardson. I'd say, yes, to reintroduce myself, just for completeness, if anyone's just logged in. Yeah, I'm Joe Richardson. I'm the Interim Director of Development and Place Delivery at the Council. So, yeah, just a brief introduction to the paper. So, the paper is really about accelerating delivery on the Winstanley York Road regeneration. We are seeking approval to Ploughhead with the demolition of Penithorne House and Arthur Newton House once vacant possession is secured. Please report that Block 5 will shortly be completing. We're expecting people to start moving in there in April this year. So, I think everyone can see, from the outside at least, that, yeah, it's a really striking building and a great example of the work we're doing there. We will, of course, be moving ahead with the updated design of Block 6, bringing it up to the latest safety standards. Many will record that the master plan was first set out back in 2017-2018, so the standards need to be upgraded, but we have a team lined up to do so. So, yeah, all in all, very exciting times ahead for the scheme. We've got a strong track record of delivery, and we're really confident that we're well-placed to take this forward in some really, really interesting directions and really deliver some great homes there. Thank you, Mr. Richardson. Any questions? Councillor McLean. Hello, and thank you for this. I've got these questions actually, the board councillors in the air have asked me to bring some of these up with the committee. So, I just wanted to have some clarity. So, on paragraph 13 and 14, we talk about Falkenbrook School and the fact that, obviously, they were going to be quite impacted by what was going on. And part of the agreement was that it was going to fund ways of lessening those problems for Falkenbrook. I just wonder, with the changes here, I'm hoping that those mitigations are still going to happen. I'm just hoping when, what's the timescale, what do the changes mean for that, for the school? Yeah, forgive me, my colleague couldn't make the detail, who brings the detail to the paper, but brings the detailed background to this. But, yeah, I mean, that's part of the benefit of ones who are being the lead developer here now. We're able to make these decisions on a very pragmatic basis. So, yeah, our commitment is still there. I have to come back to you in terms of timescales and that and such like, if you don't mind, please. Yeah, thank you. And I guess the rest of the questions are sort of similar. So, it's like when we talk about initiatives, the initiatives that we talk about in 16, again, the question is sort of like, that sounds great, we can get ahead with these now, but when? I suppose the reason, and they might sound very repetitive, is, as you can imagine, residents there have been waiting for a long time. There have been lots of stops and starts. There's an element of us, I think, needing to rebuild trust and rebuild the fact that we're actually going to do some of this. Oh, I'm sorry. There's an element of us needing to rebuild a little bit of trust. That's why I'm asking these sorts of questions. I want to. We absolutely recognise that. And, as you say, we are in the early stages of really looking at this. But they're high priority. I'll have to come back with an update in June. So, we made that commitment, and that will be very much part of that. Apologies I can't add any more detail right now, but it's front and centre of what we're talking about here. Do you want to talk about this particular one? Okay. So, Mr Moore, if you'd like to introduce yourself. Yeah, good afternoon, members. Good evening, members. Sorry. My name's Paul Moore. I'm interim director of place. Just on the last set of questions, Councillor, if I may, I just wanted to be really clear that we completely get and understand the point about picking up those relations with key partners in the community. We're really keen to do that as a team. I just wanted to reference back, really, to the Alton programme. I mean, you get a sense there of the kind of commitment that we're trying to give to another, even more substantial, even larger estate renewal programme. It clearly takes us a bit of time to pick up those threads and those reins, but we're really, really keen to do that, and I hope the previous paper gives you a sense of that commitment and where we'd like to take some of those discussions. In particular, the school, I completely understand, is a key priority in terms of those discussions. Thank you. I just wanted to make that point. Thanks. Sure, yeah. Sorry, and thank you for that. Seeing as I've got you there now, I wasn't going to ask the other questions. I think it's more about place than the buildings, but as anyone who spends any time on Winstanley knows, there's a longstanding, I would say, a longstanding problem with safety and crime and issues like that, and part of this development was always supposed to be about managing out or designing out some of those problems. Again, can you give me some reassurance that these are a priority and that we're going to get some movement on making people feel safe on the estate? Certainly, all considerations about community safety are fundamental to resident perceptions in the area, and that would be an absolute priority. Certainly, what I would be keen for us to do is to, as you've seen again on the Alton, sorry to keep referring out to there, but to build programs of place-based interventions which are driven by the concerns the residents have. I think you saw in the Alton, you know, several hundred contacts made by residents over the two years leading up to the development of that program. We'd be keen to do something very similar. Winstanley, you'll cry, but as Mr. Richardson's already said, program forming, we need a bit of time to pick up those threads, do some of that background work, reach out to key members of the community, and then bring forward coherent programs that are resourced that we can then actually deliver with certainty and confidence. That's what we'd like to do, and the commitment is to bring back a report along those lines in June, members. Mr. Tiller? Yes, could you say a bit more about how existing tenants and leaseholders are being kept informed about developments? Yes, well, first and foremost, we had an event a week or two ago now just to be transparent with local residents to reassure them where we are going. We haven't formally collected that feedback yet, but I think, you know, obviously people had concerns, but the message is very positive. We are here to, we have greater control over our respective destiny here, and actually, and that was very much the message we're offering. So we will, of course, keep them up to date as we move forward, but as I say, it's really early days, but we've had that initial meeting, and I hope residents, you know, I'm confident a lot of residents did show up and gained some better understanding of where we are on that. Councillor Ali Jones? Thanks, Chair. I've got a question on paragraph six. So it refers to the decanting of certain properties, which will then be or will be available for use as temporary accommodation. Is it the intention that all those units would be made available for temporary accommodation, and what impact is that likely to have on the overspends that are detailed elsewhere in the agenda? John, Mr. McWorth to take that, Mr. Richardson. Yeah. Yes, thanks, Councillor. So the use of those blocks once decanted to the permanent tenants as temporary accommodation has been a feature for many, many years. So as you'll see in the later paper, we've got something like, don't quote me exactly, but close to 1,000 permanent units occupied as temporary accommodation. So rather than build them up, keep them empty, keep families elsewhere in London at a much higher cost, we use them in that way, and, you know, it is significantly cheaper. So I don't have precise details here of what that would do in terms of whether we would end up by using those units with more than we've had traditionally, say, in Pennythorne. It may be. It's kind of neutral, but it's all part of the strategy to keep the overspend, you know, within control. To limit the overspend, I think, would be the best way of putting it. So it is part of that strategy. It's interesting to be doing some work in the last few days looking at sort of the longer-term history of this, and actually our proportions of housing revenue account units compared to general fund units has remained fairly consistent, even though the numbers have gone up, you know, significantly over the 15-year period I was looking at. So hopefully that provides some context. Councillor Barrett-Farage. Thank you, Chair. I've got a question on the private rented homes that are being built. In general, like, what has been the Council's experience with building private rented homes on Council estates? Like, how many, is there a number? And with the private rented homes in the past where the Council has done this, have we seen these private rented homes then being rented back to the Council at higher rent, so that the Council can use them for temporary accommodation? You mean private homes? Yeah, private rented homes that are being built on the Council estates. Have we seen these then being rented back to the Council to be used for temporary accommodation? I hope that makes sense. So the private sale ones that landlords buy? The short answer is I don't know. What we do know is that on our estates there is a secondary market mainly made up of X right to buy properties, which over the years are offered to us as temporary accommodation and are taken. So the more recently built units, the private rent, the market rent properties, my feeling is we would have taken, we wouldn't have been offered many of those, but that's just my instinct on that. We don't have numbers, I'm afraid. Yeah. Coming a little bit on this, which has to do with the history of the phasing. So we rebuilt the school and there was a grad pad and, yeah, some private – so as far as I'm aware, there'd be no build-to-rent schemes within the first phase, but obviously once private sale units go up, they can be leased out. You know, as a Council, I guess what the key part from this paper is, after years of basically kind of deadlock, just like on the Alton, we're taking this back in-house so that we can move fast. There will be discussions that will come to this committee later on about what the nature of any redrawing of that looks like, but that isn't for this committee. And we have such a clear next stage, which has been held up for so long when it comes to Pentathorn, that really our priority is to bring Pentathorn down and start building so that those families that have been waiting for much too long now, you know, five-year delays, get that housing quick. So we're not keeping you in the dark on that, but, you know, firstly we want to just crack on with those residents who've been affected by the delays, and then we can come back and start talking about tenure types. But, you know, obviously everyone knows my position. The more Council housing that we can get out of Council land is the priority of this Council. So York Road, when Stanley regeneration was one we inherited, and where we've inherited schemes like this, we always try and maximise Council housing. Council Austin? It's just been asked and answered. All right. So are we happy to receive? Sorry, sorry. I thought your thunder had already been taken, Ms. Price, so if I have two questions in a second. Sorry, thank you. I do ask the members if they'll bear with me while I read my note. Thank you. I'd like to raise the disappointment of our residents on the lack of proper communication. I have a really good relationship with the Regen staff, and I'm fortunate with this relationship. However, the residents are asking me what is happening and are becoming despondent. We all received a letter from Simon on the joint venture split. I understand what that means, but for the residents, what does that mean? We should have moved last March, then it became August, then it may be just before Christmas, maybe just after Christmas. Then we were told that the road was holding it up. Residents were constantly going to the site and air-bashing me as no work was going on on the road. Then we got the letter of the JV split, and they're now feeling that we are going nowhere and going nowhere fast. Personally, I have both happiness and unhappiness. Happy with the split. I've always been very open that I did not want Taylor Wimpy, the unhappiness. Taylor Wimpy was responsible for using their money to build our lovely new library, leisure centre, and swimming pool. That's gone. Housing focuses on building new homes, and we need that, but we've lost the new leisure centre. I believe that the move will now take place sometime in April, and I've just heard that. The residents don't know that yet. I have raised with our leasehold regen officer that it may be prudent to ensure that the leaseholders takes place before the new additional stamp duty cost comes into effect. This will now start at $125,000, as against the current $250,000. Surely we need some more money. We need this money to build more homes. Now on another issue, parking. I am sure that at the time of the negotiation, if it was known that the CPZ was being planned, that something would have been put in place for the residents. Just before the implementation, I was in discussions with the parking office to ensure that I passed on the correct messages at our next RA meeting. The officer volunteered to me as a by-the-way. When you move to the new bills, you will not be entitled to parking permits. I have raised this issue many times. We knew that there would be reduced parking. Braun Mansion has 126 units and eight parking spaces, of which four are disabled. We are being moved due to the regeneration. We should not be penalized. In May this year, I have lived in Scully House for 43 years. I've always had a car. But now there is a precedent set. In January 2024, paper 24-04 on page 7, on the Lenox X stake, paragraph 10-4, speaks of plans to introduce a CPZ to present non-estate parking, and an EPS and estate parking scheme will be implemented. Paragraph 5 goes on to state that residents of any new homes developed will be precluded from securing parking permits save the disabled badge holders and those residents who may be transferring from existent homes on the estate to the new homes. Please, can this facility be given to these long-time car holders? And I have the paper that proves that it's going to be done on one estate, so that's a precedent. Thank you. We don't doubt that, Ms. Price. Do you want to take that? Yeah, some of them I'll be able to answer in more detail. Some of them I won't be able to. And some of you will repeat of what I kind of said when I was summing up. So, you know, you'll know because you were here. We battled on this regeneration because of the vision that we thought was there. And we've had some victories. You know, the amount of social housing has increased. The reason why we are where we are is because those delays and the insolvency of the joint venture meant that we had to make a decision and the priority of the council was to make sure that we had the control to be able to act because the worst thing is when you're in paralysis and you have residents. You know, and the opposition were privy to these discussions at the gold paper closed sessions that we had and supported the issue because there's nothing worse for our residents than that kind of paralysis. The commitment of this committee and this paper is to say, now that we are out of the JV, the emphasis on us is to show that we can deliver and that we can move fast. Now, on communication, one of the challenges was we couldn't communicate any of this until it was all done for, again, the reasons why we had things out of public settings and commercially sensitive papers and things like that. So that's, you know, we can only throw our hands up and say we're sorry and now we are starting to communicate and we will try and give people more clarity. The second part on the nature of the previous master plan, I kind of alluded to it in my comments previously, but on the leisure centre and things like that, we will come back to this committee with decisions. But in some ways, because we've taken it back in-house ourselves, you know, there will be changes in priority and decision because we weren't the original master planners. Yeah, but the JV model and the cross-subsidy model that was inherent in the JV model in order to provide facilities that were no longer housing, there are alternatives and we will come with offers because we don't want to see and we will always consult with residents about anything that drops off from their expectations. We have to do that. You know, we're publicly accountable to the expectations we set people when they first heard about this. But we can't go into the details now because we basically want to crack on and get Peniforon down and build the housing that people need to move into. And then we'll come back and we'll be able to discuss the leisure centre. And, you know, also things have changed a lot in the last 10 years in terms of the provision of what people might want and desire, right? So we're open to discussing that. On parking in CPZs, this is really interesting and important. Obviously, there is a set policy within the council. You're right to highlight the Lennox within the 1,000 homes. We have actually had some discretion I know of on one scheme on the York Redwynn Stanley around the parking to do with the Falkenbrook School. So there is also a precedent on the York Redwynn Stanley. So it's something that I will take to my colleagues in Transport, Jenny. Obviously, parking is an eternal challenge with all local authorities. And, you know, you highlight the parking spaces, again, under a planning authority that wasn't when we were in control. But the move is towards less parking spaces on developments. And that we know that the reality for our own tenants, particularly if they're doing a move, there is an expectation there. So I'll make sure that I can clarify that with you. And also come with any interim arrangements, because a CPZ seems like, you know, possibly a good idea in order to make sure that people who are using the estate, it's not just being parked on as free-for-all, which is one of the problems we have. Thank you. What about saving some money on the stamp duty? Because from 1 April, the lower level is 125,000, as against 250 now. Could we not ensure that any of the leaseholders say that they're, even though they're not moved in, their documentation could be done to save that 125,000 per leaseholder? That is a question that I cannot make on the spot on this, but I think it's one I'd definitely take away to officers. And I'm wondering if there was an officer who could speak on that, possibly. If not, it's one we'll get back to you. Councillor Austin can. The estate agent is putting his hand up. That's making me nervous. No, because the stamp duty is liable upon completion, not upon exchange, and therefore it can't be changed, sadly. Oh, so that's a week for the 125,000 per week. Thanks, Mr. JV. Thanks, Mr. JV. Yeah, a lot of things. Thanks to the JV, unfortunately. You should have listened to me in the first place and not taken. I wasn't here, but I would have backed you 100%, Marlene, so, yeah. Councillor Alley-Jones? Can I just ask a quick question on the communication point? And this is possibly coming from a place of ignorance, but I know that on the Alton estate, we've got Alton News, which is a regular publication that keeps residents informed. Do we have something like Winstanley News? Yeah, we do. Very, very rare. So it's very rare, because I think Alton News is quite regular, actually, or at least the copies I see seem quite regular. I was just thinking, is it time that we step up Winstanley News, basically? That could be a vehicle for keeping residents informed. The important thing is for those residents who are moving into Brown Mansion to be told something. That's more important. Can we hold one meeting, sorry? Mr Moore, did you want to say something on that? Yeah, just very briefly, members. I think you've also reflected, Councillor Dickerden reflected, on the time of the year of the particular change that had a degree of awkwardness in terms of our ability to project news over the Christmas, New Year period. I'm sure, members, you'll understand that practical difficulty. The main point I wanted to say, though, was, again, back to the Alton, that there's been a genuine and dynamic appreciation of the need for communication in that space. So, personal commitment, I'm sure, from the team, Mr Richardson and others, and the Cabinet lead would want to assure you with all that we can to project the right news at the right time. We'll clearly move through a number of phases on Winstanley York Road. We get how important, in terms of the state, regeneration, investment, renewal, the news, bringing forward news swiftly and authentically to residents, is clearly critical to winning hearts, minds, trust as we move forward. Quite what that means, the frequency of news, that is, I think, the team would want to review that with ward councillors, get their take on things, and with some community leaders as well. So, that's part of that assessment that we would like to undertake in the next few weeks. Thank you. Fantastic. OK, are we happy to receive this paper and recommendations, A and B? Yep. OK, good. OK, so, item six, which is the PRS discretionary licensing paper. Mr. Nash. Yeah, good evening, councillors. I'm Chris Nash, Head of Residential and Pollution Services. For the context of this meeting, this is everything private sector housing related. I've prepared a short-ish introduction to the paper. It's quite a weighty one, so please bear with me. So, members will be aware of the direction given by this committee back in September 2023 to develop proposals for discretionary property licensing. Over the last 15 months, the landscape in this squad has shifted quite significantly, both in terms of the prevalence of hazards in the PRS, but perhaps more importantly and recently, the government's devolution decision-making to transfer licensing in totality to local councils to make their own decisions. Within this period, after both the mayoral and general election, the council embarked on a long 12-week public consultation from July to October 2024, inviting feedback on three potential schemes. First of those is a borough-wide additional HMO scheme, which is for those larger properties containing three or more people across two households. There's roughly about 2,500 of those properties, not already addressed within the current mandatory scheme. Secondly, a selective licensing scheme. This is for the remainder of the PRS. To the south of the borough, in the wards of Furzdown, Tootingbeck, Tootingbroadway and South Balaam, roughly 9,500 properties there. And thirdly, another selective scheme within the wards of Northcote, East Putney and West Putney, comprising around 6,500 properties. The scope of these three schemes were informed by a stock condition survey and modelling undertaken by an independent expert consultant and previously presented to this committee. The outcomes of this modelling highlighted that properties and wards were set out, were likely to contain properties with serious hazards above the national average. Around 1,000 people engaged with the consultation via both online survey, in writing, or through attending one of two public forums. Analysis of the responses has been undertaken, which demonstrated a polarity in views on the scheme, with broad disagreement amongst landlord and managing agent groups, in comparison to support amongst tenant, owner-occupiers and stakeholders. And that feedback is listed within the appendices provided. The principal concerns expressed within free text were around fees and charges. Some of the comments setting out that we were amounting to profiteering through them and that the conditions of the licence were too onerous and that there were some technical wording of conditions that people would like change to provide further clarity. In contrast, support was expressed to the manner in which the schemes will be able to guarantee the overall quality of the PRS in the selected areas, where the council perceived as better able to resource the amount of support being offered to vulnerable tenants and those in need. So reflecting this feedback given, some technical wording has well been amended and provided within the papers, along with two further discounts for both energy efficiency and for those properties rented back to the social sector. Licensing fees will indeed be ring-fenced to support the scheme alone and not to the wider general fund, and are considered affordable against the backdrop of high rent levels throughout the borough, the average of that in the ONS papers, around £2,400 per calendar month. The recommendations before the committee will enable the council to implement the additional HMO and Selective Scheme 1 in July of this year, supported by a Gold Property Charter and enforced by an updated enforcement policy presented within these papers also. Reflecting the scale, however, of the change required, particularly with regard to the staffing commitment, around 30 to 40 new staff will be required to support this scheme. It is proposed that a paper be brought back to this committee in October, both updating members on the delivery of the first two schemes and setting forward a timetable for the formal approval and delivery of Selective Licensing Designation 2. The proposals before members will enable four key objectives to be delivered, creating a fairer PRS, increasing tenant awareness, improving conditions and management, and the overall increased landlord engagement with the council. I'll stop there and invite any questions. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Nash. Any questions? Councillor Rigby. Yeah. So this actually relates to a piece of casework I've got at the moment with a landlord who will not provide bins, so we've got a rat issue on one of the streets, which is pretty bad. So when we, which is brilliant, so 70, on page 77, it's brilliant that there's going to have to be checks carried out for pest control. How is that going to work to make sure that they are? And also, I would like some sort of clearer writing about what they're supposed to provide. So it says adequate facilities for the disposal of refuse and recycling. So what I'm finding is that in quite a lot of the properties in Balham, for instance, the landlords years and years ago built these like little bins, bins, bin sheds in the front gardens that are now in pretty bad conditions and nobody really wants to go and put their stuff in it. And, you know, it's where rats are living. So, and they're not providing proper bins with lids. So I'm meeting so many private residents, private tenants who are saying their landlord will not provide a bin or the bin's just falling apart and it's dirty. So I just think we, it would be really helpful to have it absolutely clear. You must provide a bin. It has to have a lid. You have to clean the bin like X number of times a year. So it's like helping people to keep their premises tidy and clean. Yeah, thank you for that, Councillor. And I think the two things to take away from this scheme is, one, we are required by the law to keep the conditions under total review. And the second part there is around accountability. So previously up until now, we'd only ever be able to have that ongoing dialogue where we've kind of reacting to a case rather than a proactive approach. This licensing scheme will ensure that there is almost a name above the door, someone who tenants can turn to, the council can turn to, but also it would equip the council with much more resources to be able to kind of work proactively with properties that may have an endemic problem with ramps, for example. Or if we're noticing that there is a issue with waste management across the borough, it allows us to actually take on that learning and provide issue with our colleagues in waste, et cetera, and private contractors. So it's one of that relationship building to tackle problems exactly as you've set out. And there's 52 more officers for this purpose as well, aren't there, too? 52 officers in total for the team. I think an additional 30 to 40 for this section. Thank you, Mr Nash. Any more questions? Councillor Austin. Thank you very much. Surprisingly, I think the cabinet member will find, I'm actually broadly in support of this. I think that, you know, the public service announcement will be, I hope I run an incredibly reputable business, and we're a member of more than one of these redress schemes. And there is, obviously, an incredibly small percentage, like with everything, that give landlords a bad name and give estate agents a bad name. So the more that we can pull that, weed that out, the better. My first question is, there seems to be no costs, as in, you said we need 30 to 40 more officers, but in all the money, you've arrived at £850 and £450. It's for five years. There's a finite number of properties. What are the percentage of properties you think are going to leave the market? How many are you going to just try and shirk their responsibilities? So we've got a total, and then there's discounts on top of that. How much is it actually going to cost to run this scheme? Yeah, thank you, Councillor. So there's been a financial model sitting behind this scheme as it's approached this council, which has gone through finance colleagues as well. The expected revenue generated by the additional HMO scheme is around £3.5 million. And depending on whether we go for both selective licence designation one or two, a revenue ranging from about £5 million to £9 million. So not insubstantial. The sum, around 80% of that cost is on staffing, the 30 to 40 staff that we provided. There are also IT costs, legal costs, communications costs associated with it and how we want to kind of frame that engagement. So it's a bit of a moving feast, and we need to, the next steps will be to relaunch a communication strategy and IT programme to onboard this. So it's kept fairly fluid, but those are the broad headline figures. Councillor Ayers? Sorry, can we come back on that? Not at that point. I'll just keep going. No, okay. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Somebody else, feel free to jump in. Okay, Councillor Ayers. I wanted to ask about housing associations. I mean, how, does this reach into the worker housing associations? Because I'm sure there's a dreadful landlord and so inaccessible. Good evening. Roy Fielding, Private Sector Housing Manager. Housing associations are exempt from this licensing scheme. It's, yeah, set out in the legislation as social housing providers. Well, that's a pity, okay? But I understand. I feared that was the case. Thank you. Thank you. Just say they're covered by the regulator of social housing. Go, Mr. Okay. Councillor Verifage. Thank you. I welcome this paper. I want to say thank you to everyone that was involved. You can see quite a lot of work has gone into it. When the scheme does get rolled out, how soon can we expect the conditions in those wards? How soon can we expect the conditions to improve in those wards where the scheme has been rolled out? Thank you. Yeah, the answer to that is as long as a piece of string, really. But the scheme is promised to go live July 2026. Before then, there will be a period of application and support from a technical basis. Officers will then be commencing their kind of enforcement and inspection regime towards the autumn. So, by the end of the calendar year, we will have a chunk of data to be able to bring back to this committee. But we want to be able to advise on the engagement and the uptake of the scheme in our proposed paper in October of this year. So, there will be the initial bits of news in October. Any other questions? Councillor Austin. Thank you very much, Chair. Just on the public notice and things, they haven't been published, I'm hoping. At least they haven't. No, not until we did with the exit. Yeah, in several places, they refer to the London Borough of Southwark. So, I'm assuming that we've just copied somebody else's homework on that basis. Moving on to the licences themselves, and I've been very sad I've actually read this cover to cover, almost 300 pages of it. There are, I agree with Councillor Rigby, there are a few language issues that are a bit... I think, you know, I commend the officers. They've approached this very slowly, and that's brilliant, because we need to get this absolutely right and not fast and make sure that we're as tight as we possibly can be, and there's no pushback where we could be liable. And there's a lot of language issues in here that are very loose and just don't quite meet the pest control and dustbins and things like that being one of them. The first mention of EICR certificates, which is a legal requirement since 2021, is on page 208. They're not in any of the licences at all, but yet that is a statutory requirement, and so they need to be in the licences. I've got... I'll give this sort of few big ones, but there are quite a few, and I just think that maybe we just need to look, check the homework again, and come back, and come back, because there's quite a few anomalies in here. Yeah, thank you, Councillor, for pointing that out, and that's disappointing that we haven't picked this up prior to this committee, so it's noted, and we'll be sure to make sure they are iron-tight before we go and publish them, if that is the will of the committee. Councillor Ali Jones. Thanks, Chair. I mean, like Councillor Farah Faraj and Councillor Austin, I really welcome the principle behind this scheme, and in fact, this builds on a lot of work that was done behind the scenes in the last Conservative administration, so really glad to see this coming to committee tonight. Unfortunately, when we see schemes like this implemented in other boroughs, it's not had a happy record of implementation and effectiveness, so like Councillor Austin says, we've got to get this right. I've got two questions, but I'll ask them one at a time, and allow the cabinet member, perhaps, and the officers to answer. The first is the obvious concern that tenants have, which is that the fee will just be passed directly on to them in increased rents, so I'd be grateful for the cabinet member or the officers thinking on how we can mitigate that risk. I think the... I don't remember the opposition backing landlord licensing when we brought it up on quite a few occasions in the committee. Now, it may well have been going on behind the doors, but certainly wasn't supported in the committee. Yes, on the fee, if you... Let's say they theoretically did pass on the five-year fee to the tenant. We averaged it out as... I think it was two pounds... Yeah, yeah. So it's a... And obviously, no one wants to have a fee passed on to them, but if that was the cost of being able to get your deposit back, having council support in investigation of Category 1 hazards, you know, that's kind of the regulatory pressure. Now, the thing I say honestly to tenants when they bring this up is annual rent increases in Wandsworth every year have been going up far beyond that three-pound fee increase. So if we're just honest and we don't play politics with this, we know that if we did nothing, next year their rents would likely go up. It's why I advocate for rent control. I'm very public about it. I lobby the government about it. I speak out on it. I think if we want to protect tenants' rents, the best way to do that is rent control. In order to make life renting easier along... If we're not going to get rent control and we can't implement rent control as a local authority, the second best way to try and make sure that renting is easy and you're protected in Wandsworth is through the licensing. So that was on the basis that if all landlords did do it. The second point is there is no evidence that landlords do that. So you can look at all the other boroughs and there is no evidence that landlords do actually end up passing on the five-year fee to their tenants. So that's a kind of empirical point. So I've got the kind of political point and the empirical point. And I kind of add to that that obviously the first thing that happens when you say you're going to do a licensing scheme is every landlord turns around and says, well, I'm going to place it on as a kind of almost a bit of a threat to the local authority. And if you came to the consultation, some of you, you might have sat in on them because they were on Zoom. And you would have seen the kind of some of the arguments that were made against doing this. So I'm glad that I'm glad you support it because you're probably aware of all the arguments. They're the same arguments that were put against it, that the entire market is going to fall out, that everyone is going to sell up, that rents are going to skyrocket. And, you know, as someone who spent five years of my life renting, I find that frustrating because it's, you know, that isn't the experience of what Wandsworth is going to be like. Wandsworth is, I think there are, we have to have honest and real conversations about supply in terms of the renters' rights bill. We've seen Section 21s go up, particularly on low-income families. But I think broadly Wandsworth, with this scheme, will not just remain a place where people will want to rent properties. It's going to remain a place where it's very profitable to rent properties. And I'm hoping that this brings up the standards for everyone, so for both landlords and for tenants. So I hope that's a large enough politics, empirical evidence, and my kind of economic analysis of what it would be like to be a landlord in Wandsworth. Thank you. I mean, in fairness, that was a very honest answer. I mean, the first part of your answer was that if it does happen, the administration thinks that's a price worth paying for the benefits the administration says are going to be delivered. I think it's quite an honest position to have. But that leads me to my second concern with the implementation, which is that there is a risk that for the properties that are compliant with these schemes, essentially it's an increase in rent potentially for no benefit, whereas for the rogue landlords who don't comply with this, it's an increase in rent for no benefits that are desperately needed. You know, I'm not going to dwell on the case of the high-profile case of the Labour MP who, when he was the Labour leader of the council, introduced a scheme like this and was found to have nine properties of his own that were eligible or liable under the scheme and didn't register them. So, the paper deals in some detail with the enforcement mechanism. Are you satisfied that we have learnt everything we can from previous failings elsewhere? And what will you be looking out for as this process develops? Yeah, so all the meetings that I've had with both tenant groups, London Renters' Union, different charities, you know, I used to work for the New Economics Foundation and there was a lot of work going on around licensing. The key is the inspection regime. So, you can have an all-singing, all-dancing, nice piece, wad of paper that says that this is what we're going to do. And the key is boots on the ground, visiting the properties, hiring the staff that are regularly going out and inspecting. And that is the feedback from all the local authorities that I've spoken to and all the organisations I've spoken to that campaign for licences. They say, and it's a challenge, and we'll face that challenge, and Chris will face that challenge, is that the capacity through which you can hire up the staff to do this work is challenging because it's a new and growing role and all the local authorities are trying to do it. So, the best measures for us as a committee will be, like, how many inspections are we doing? You know, how many people are, because there will be a bottleneck at the start, right? Like, we can't just grant licences based on inspections because we won't have the staff through which to do it. So, we will grant some licences out early, and those licences will be based not on an inspection regime. So, that's the next stage is making sure that we're going out and visiting as many properties as possible. So, that's, you know, that would be my answer to how you make sure that this actually does raise up standards. Because if the money isn't going into physical property checks, regular property checks, and also I think something that we're very keen on in Wandsworth is how can we use some of that money to just support, set up, you know, creative ways that if you're a young renter in Wandsworth and you're struggling to get through to your landlord, what soft power do we have as a local authority to just come in behind you and send a bit of a letter that sounds a bit scary, where a landlord actually makes a move, you know, those are the kind of things that I think would really ease and show tenants in Wandsworth that were on their side. Because you're absolutely right. You can, we can pass this at a committee, and it's only as good as the inspections that take place afterwards. And the enforcement, you know, the court cases, the rogue landlords that we don't send three letters warning them. We say, no, we're just going to take you to court. Chris, do you want to jump in? Yeah, I just wanted to bring to members' attention the, one of the key four objectives of the scheme is to increase engagement with the landlord sector. So the authorities in the country that have done this successfully, or most successfully in my view, have encouraged a greater kind of network. So they're using things like e-zines, newsletters, landlord forums to really get that tight-knit group of compliant landlords offering a greater service to them. It's a tight-knit community, and those landlords will know those rented properties in their marketplace that aren't conforming. And by getting that relationship together, not just from the hard arm of the law through to a, you know, a more softer engagement approach, you're able to target those non-compliant landlords better and support those landlords that are genuinely, and this is the vast majority of them, genuinely doing an excellent job in supporting their tenants. So it's hand in glove. And I suppose with other measures coming down the line as well, I mean, a more stable and decent environment, I think both landlords and private renters, I think, would be much more in favour rather than the scattergun situation we have at the moment. Any more questions? Councillor Austin. Thank you. I've lost it in this report, and I can't, sadly, I can't pick it up anymore. But it had a breakdown of the tenants, and so it had a breakdown of landlords and whether they're professional landlords, accidental landlords, HMO landlords, and there is a very large proportion of accidental landlords in the borough. I can tell you that from my own experience. We're offering £850 for a five-year licence. However, those accidental landlords don't want to rent for a five-year period. They want to rent for one or two years. Have we considered and looked at an option for a shorter licence at a lower price, obviously for landlords that want to get into the market and hopefully maybe stop an immediate problem with regards to a paper later, and even rent to us as a council, while they make their moves and look to potentially sell at what they want to do next? Yes, we did consider it as part of the consultation exercise. It was a query raised. Councillor Austin. Sorry, yeah. We considered it as part of the consultation exercise, and we published a list of those responses on the web. So the hard part of that kind of shorter timescale is you are somewhat just as likely to have a category one hazard in a property being let for six months than you are to five years. And so to offer that shorter period of time or that discounted fee for that period of time, you still need to inspect those properties to make sure they are hazard-free. And so it becomes almost unworkable to do on a varying fee and charges level. So we considered it. We decided against it. Is that a hand, councillor? Okay, no more questions? Okay. So can we support recommendations A to H? Yep. Okay, good. Okay, moving on to the next paper, which is item seven, and it's the budget monitoring report. And it's Officer Burry. Thank you, Chair. I'm Sandra Burry, the Assistant Director for Finance and Business Support in Housing. So the quarter three report provides an overview of the General Fund's revenue budget position for the remit of this committee. We are currently projecting an overspend of 6.114 million against a revived budget of 26.894 million. At quarter two, we were reporting an overspend of 5.212 million, which is mainly for housing services, direct homelessness costs. Unfortunately, there has now been an increase in this forecast, and we have reviewed the predicted year-end numbers for people in temporary accommodation. So the revised prediction on these are now 3,975 compared to 3,802 at quarter two. So that's an increase of 173. So bearing that in mind, we've had to cost all of that out, and that is why the forecast has unfortunately increased. I stated that the main reason for this overspend is related to housing services budgets caused by the high demand and high cost of homelessness support and provision of accommodation. This is discussed more in the housing activity report, so I don't really want to step into that report because it does address how the service is trying to manage and reduce this forecast going forward. Also within the report, the Director of Finance has added the proposed budget position in Appendix C for information. This will be presented at Finance and Overviews Committee tomorrow evening. Any questions? Are there any questions? I would suggest that, yeah, there's a possibility that we can combine both with the housing services because of how related they are, but I'm happy to take questions on this as well. Okay, I'm sorry. Oh, we do have one question. Okay. Thank you very much. We have £6.114 million overspend. Again, it's budgeted at £26,894 million. We're looking at projected spend of £33,099,000. Then at the bottom of the paper for next year, so 25, 26, we're looking at a budget at £29,740,000. I wasn't here this time last year, but I reckon if I look at the papers last year, there was probably a 20% overspend on budget then, and if I look at the year before that, there'll be a 20% overspend on budget. Surely we should look at this and look at we're probably going to spend £33,000,000, so the figure we need to take to finance is £33,000, and say that we don't overspend by 20% year on year. Thank you, Councillor. Yes, that has been addressed in the proposed budget report. There are teams that are working to try and reduce that, so my colleague will go through the services activity report and will be demonstrating ways that they are trying to reduce this forecast. So, yes, at the moment, if numbers remain the same and the unit costs do not continue to... We are experiencing slight reductions in those. If that doesn't continue, then, yes, we will be looking at a worse out-term situation. Thanks, Councillor. I was hesitating, because no doubt this issue will come up in the next paper, but just to say that on your point about the forecasting, obviously this is a very dynamic area, which an individual borough's ability to influence is quite limited because it's a London-wide market. It's a London-wide issue, national issue, really. Just to put it in context, temporary accommodation numbers now are at a record high, going back to whenever the government started recording the figures, which was probably in the 1980s, early 1980s. This paper references, as does the next one, and it is cold comfort. However, if you make those comparisons, our rate of increase is increasing slower than other boroughs in London. I think this paper references, we are a borough that is fully compliant with our legal responsibilities, so we don't use Bed and Breakfast for families. That, sadly, not the same can be said for many other in London boroughs, and the use of Bed and Breakfast for families has gone literally stratospheric in the last couple of years, or last year, really. Which is indicative of the fact we are in the teeth of a raging crisis. But it's not inevitable that that will continue, and just to point some things that may well influence that, was referenced in the last paper. The Renters' Reform Act we expect to come into law sometime in spring, early summer. About 20% of the people we accept as homeless and place into temporary accommodation come out of the private rented sector on the back of a section 21 notice. Of course, under the reforms, landlords will still be able to regain possession, but within more tightly defined and evidenced circumstances. So, that's one change that will happen. As this paper also references, we are looking to reduce our reliance on the highest, and sometimes the worst form of temporary accommodation, which is these nightly paid units. And one of the ways we can do that is through large-scale leasing schemes. So, just today, we've been approached by a landlord who is bringing to the table a 200-unit scheme. Now, I've set up a meeting with them for two Mondays' time, so I don't know the details. I'm not going to speculate whether the deal they may be offering is a good, bad, or indifferent one, but just the flag that this work goes on all the time. So, if that comes in at 10%, 15% cheaper than the provision we're currently making, then the budgetary position would shift by a similar proportion. So, I don't know if that offers any reassurance, but it gives some context, hopefully. No, thank you. No, it absolutely does. Thank you. And also, I do actually commend all the officers for their hard work, because I did read in the paper that we do hit 100% of our... because we don't use bed and breakfast, and we are at 100% on that, which is no mean feat, and it takes an incredibly large amount of work. So, it's a commendation to be commended for that. Okay. No more questions? Are we happy to note this report for information? Okay. So, going on to item number eight, housing services activity update. Thank you, Ms. Burrell. And its officer is Councillor Nazir. Yeah, sorry. Good evening. I'm Kazan Arsia, interim director of Housing Services. So, this paper details the homelessness and our housing activity position as at the end of November 2024, against the forecast that we set out in the July paper. And just to clarify, that the homelessness activity position is a month earlier than the performance set out in the earlier report. So, as at the end of November, there were 4,078 placements in temporary accommodation, against a revised forecast of 3,975. The original forecast that we set in July was 3,802, and we revised that at the end of October 2024 due to the rising demand. So, in paragraphs five to seven, the increasing demand for temporary accommodation has resulted in a net increase of 278 placements since the end of March 2024. Sorry, in paragraph seven, there's a small typo. The number should read 399, not 1399, in terms of the numbers who've made their own temporary accommodation arrangements. In paragraph eight, as Mr. Worth pointed out, it should be noted that the use of bread and breakfast has increased. There's been no breach of the six-week suitability order, and that still remains the case. Around 85% of our temporary accommodation use is self-contained. Paragraphs 10 to 12 details the other types of temporary accommodation used, particularly under the private sector leasing scheme and within the Council's general needs stock. Paragraphs 14 to 21 details the increased demand for the services. In the month of July, August, October, and November, there was more than 400 presentations, i.e. nearly 1,700 over these months. Since March 2024, there have been over 3,000 presentations. In comparison to the same period, in the last financial year, this represents 15% increase in the numbers first admitted into temporary accommodation. In paragraph 17, details the most prevalent reason for homelessness, mainly friends and family exclusions, domestic abuse, and the end of an assured shorthold tenancy. In paragraph 19, it can be seen that landlord incentives are making an impact on activity, so this is one of the initiatives that we set out in the June-July paper around landlord incentives, and it's starting to prove itself. In fact, that we've already carried out 179 moves at the end of November, and at the end of December, this has now increased to 201 moves, and we've got roughly about 80 properties in the pipeline for private sector use over the next month or so. So, turning to the resources and commitments, paragraphs 22 to 27, provides a progress against the resources forecast. 890 properties have been let against a forecast of 1381, and we are around 41 properties behind, mainly around council and RSL vacancies. And, as you can see from the appendix, that we are let to the private renter sector are 31 ahead, which supports the strengthened landlord incentives. It may also be noted that we're ahead on the homeless forecast by 23, and remain so today, as well as being 22 ahead for those who have moved to general ease housing under the council's downsizing scheme in the Home That Fits scheme. Paragraph 27 details the improving void position, now 225 voids, including 84 temporary accommodation voids. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Nazir. Are there any questions? I think one thing to bring up is that we are going to be coming back to committee with some kind of reforms and demand-side policies to try and solve this. Like, what Councilor Alston was mentioning around the situation facing London is that, you know, I've been on this committee now for nearly, what, nine years, seven years, eight years, something like that, and every single, every single, you know, when the Homestead Reduction Act came in, we would just see that 20% every single time and that underestimation of the budget and the overspend. We're getting to the point whereby those figures are becoming huge pressures on the general fund, and in Wandsworth, we have a, you know, healthy financial position. We're not in the same boat as some of our colleagues in London where that is becoming an existential, threat to the general fund, and that, you know, that's coming with this increased demand pressures on adult social care and children's social care. So, you're right to say it cannot just continue in that direction permanently. What we are seeing is huge amounts of public money being funneled into the pockets of private landlords in order to house people in accommodation that is not secure and is often not to the quality that we would expect. It is not good for the local economy. It is not good for the London economy. It is not good for the British economy. You know, when you don't even factor in the benefit bill to that, like, this is just a huge transfer of public money into private hands. It doesn't make any sense and people aren't better off for it. So, we've got to come up with some kind of solution to this storm. You know, it's a scandal and, you know, we're trying to build as much council housing as possible. This is one of the reasons why we do that because every single council house that we build is a way someone who's overcrowded in our own stock can move into it and then TA tenant can move into that empty vacant unit or they can have a direct move. But this is an absolute priority and I, you know, whatever we can do in Wandsworth, we want to share with colleagues across London because, you know, we've seen councils going under because of this number of people who are presenting as homeless and unless we get affordability within the housing market as the priority, this will continue. So, look, we will be coming back to you. We understand that this is not something we can just pretend and pretend isn't happening because it is happening and we've watched the numbers go up every single time. That said, the Renters Reform Bill, there might be a bit of pain in the lead up to it but afterwards it will mean that we have less Section 21s. That will slow the number of people who are facing eviction. There's a wave in terms of how many social units we get year on year. So, last year we had a fairly healthy number come online. We're hoping that, you know, throughout the timeline of 1,000 homes that will also benefit. But, you know, there isn't an easy answer here other than, you know, what we talk about all the time which is a national council house building program and main control. Those are the only two things I can think of that would be able to impact within the generation and with the speed necessary to stifle the number of people who are presenting because otherwise it's just going to continue forever. Thank you. Any other questions? No? Okay. Are we happy to receive this paper for information? Yep. Okay. So, on to item. Thank you, Ms. Nazir. Item number nine which is HR budget setting including the rent setting and it's Mark Davis. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Good evening, Committee. My name is Mark Davies. I'm the financial controller for housing regeneration. I'm going to introduce the HRA budget and rent setting report. So, this report is presented each year as part of the council's duty to set budgets for its housing stock and to ensure that proposed levels of expenditure remain affordable. The report updates all planned capital and revenue expenditure and income estimates and then goes on to review rent levels and set non-residential charges. The report also covers an amendment to the council's existing rent policy. The report first recommends new capital spend of $84 million as set out in paragraph 8. Combined with the existing capital programme approved at the last business plan update the total capital investment over this and the next three years is now $627 million. This covers not only investment in existing housing stock but also the continued delivery of new housing. The proposed capital programme is set out in detail in appendix C. Paragraphs 37 and 38 cover how this capital expenditure is expected to be funded which on current plans is mainly from borrowing and a mix of capital receipts, grants and using HRA reserves. The report then goes on to look at the planned revenue expenditure. As previously reported there are a number of continuing financial pressures within the HRA specifically that relating to void properties and more general cost pressures across repairs which is presenting as an estimated £8 million overspend in the current year. Crucially for rent setting purposes the consumer price index in September 2024 was 1.7%. With regards to proposals for income including that from tenants' rents the report confirms that in accordance with the rent standard the council is permitted to increase rents by CPI plus 1% so a maximum of 2.7% and in view of the cost pressures the HRA faces and so to ensure the long-term viability of the HRA business plan recommends that rents are increased by 2.7% from April 2025. The report then details from paragraph 80 the various service charges that tenants may be charged. Paragraph 96 reviews the council's current rent policy and recommends an amendment to rely on the capping provisions set out within the rent standard rather than the existing cap. The amendments to the policy are shown in Appendix G with an impact analysis reported in Appendix H. Paragraph 111 onwards proposes that non-residential charges such as garages and storesheds are increased by an average of 2.2% in line with the council's general approach to charging. These are detailed in Appendix D. A summary of budgets are shown in the HRA framework attached to Appendix E with graphs showing the estimated reserve balances over the next 10 and 30 years included Appendix F. Finally, the report's conclusion is that a 2.7% rent increase is now necessary and that based on the estimates for income the total planned spend on the council's housing stock in the HRA is affordable over the short and longer term. Happy to take any questions. Thank you, Mr Davis. Any questions? Councillor Tiller. Thank you, Chair. So, looking at the appendices, some service chargeable costs are attached to a particular block which is reasonably easy to follow but others are attached to a wider area or even the whole borough. So, how can a leaseholder find out what they will be charged? Can I just ask what paragraph in Appendices you're referring to there, please? I believe it's the first few appendices Let me just make quite sure I've got the right Yes, so, for example in Appendix A we've got budgets for various things and I've had a query from a leaseholder about this subject. There are two types of service charges that residents might be billed. You'll get leaseholder service charges which will be by the name billed to leaseholders on estates depending on the works that have been done on their properties. That's all covered by their leases and it will be billed annually in September. The other service charges that residents face specifically tenants are the charges for tenant service charges which will cover a variety of services which are set out within the report and I'll just look for the specific paragraph. But effectively the tenant service charges are only billed to tenants that receive those services so if you were in a block that didn't have entry call you wouldn't expect to get an entry call charge so there's a thorough reconciliation done on the costs that are spent on blocks and then there's an annual exercise just to set those charges and ensure that tenants are only billed the charges for the services they receive. Mr. Tiller? I think yes. If I could follow that question because the query that was submitted to me came from a leaseholder and some leaseholders have been unhappy about service charges that they weren't expecting and would like to look ahead and see what service charges are coming up based on the figures provided here and yeah so as I said it's reasonably obvious when the block is mentioned but then you have other service charges that are for a particular area or some that cover the whole borough and so that makes things quite hard for a leaseholder to predict and yeah so when the service charges to leaseholders come in they appear as unpleasant surprises so I'm wondering so I'm wondering if so a leaseholder provided the name of their particular block could they get a breakdown of what was coming up and what fraction of the upcoming service charges for each item they had to pay could you introduce yourself Mr. Stewart Ian Stewart director of housing management this paper is not to do with leaseholder service charges I've noted your query we'll talk to you afterwards and we'll get the details of that case but this relates to service charges applying to tented rent okay thank you any more questions Councillor Ayers I've had a couple of case work resulting from elderly tenants who are struggling with the sort of kit that I struggle with because the invoices they get do not state what the invoice is for it states who the contractor is so it'll say enable but they don't know whether that's for gardening or street cleaning and is that the same point yes oh I have to talk to you afterwards this no this is this is leaseholders service charges and oh okay what okay thank you okay thank you you're going to be here till midnight mrs stewart i think and mr glockner yeah on paragraph 31 you speak of loan to value and metrics to obtain financing what what loans are you talking about are you talking about pwlb loans that you're you're generating a loan to value for or net present value or i thought a lot of these projects for a thousand homes are sort of almost self-funded out of the hra account or grants from from the city of london 31 paragraph 31 i think the point of that is we have a range of potential schemes that could come forward the development team will be looking at various sites and various opportunities and they will work through the finances of those schemes and if one stacks up better than another that's more likely to be given a green light and be taken forward subject to the normal approval process so it's referencing that sort of financial appraisal on the schemes that are coming forward yeah currently we're doing internal borrowing because the rate is good and we're trying to wait until the best possible interest rate on the public works loan board there's only so long we can keep doing that for so at some point we will start the borrowing process for the thousand homes and the payback period for that is 50 years on the current scheme Councillor Euler-Jones thank you chair on the subject of borrowing I'm looking at paragraph 37 F but it's over the page on page 272 so the first sentence says over the 30 year HRA business plan it is currently assumed that around 780 million of new borrowing is required with this assumed to be long term debt is the 750 million which is an eye popping sum in the history of this account is that the lifetime cost of the debt or is that the debt as it's taken on with interest then to be added later that is the sum borrowed with the interest to be added over the life of the borrowing have officers made an assessment of what the lifetime value of that debt is the cost of that debt based on current assumptions is built into the business plan so the business plan is affordable with that level of borrowing with the assumptions that are underpinning that and assuming payback over a 50 year period as well my question is slightly different which is 780 million is the figure without the interest what assessment have officers made of what that figure is with the interest because referencing your last answer if officers have assessed that it's affordable they must have quantified what the lifetime value of the debt was we would have done that exercise as part of the business planning process but I haven't got it to hand and obviously we haven't quoted that within the report perhaps we can follow up after the committee with that but it's going to be over a billion isn't it I would expect so I will jump in here and suggest that when we took over these plans there was around I think it was 500 million in first time borrowing for the housing revenue account under the Conservatives plans what we did is flip tenure types and that has added 200 and something million to that initial debt so it was a timing fluke of history that we took over the council to become the first to borrow on the HRA because the papers we were getting were suggesting that that was exactly what was going to happen you were going ahead with two major regenerations that was going to be borrowing on the HRA given the papers we've just previously had whereby we're spending upwards of 33 million annually on temporary accommodation over the lifetime of the housing stock and the assets that we're building for ourselves these are mortgages where we factor in the interest rate in order to develop a public asset which will later give us a profit back on it once the 50 year payback period is done those are rents into our HRA in perpetuity to help maintain stock so I can understand the point that you're making these are big figures but these are figures that are we know the calculation is the additional flipping of the units that you were going to sell which I think broadly now looking at the climate we're in in the temporary accommodation crisis you probably would have flipped some of them yourself because it wouldn't make sense for you to be selling them off so I think it's important to contextualize those figures for our residents sure sure but you're not contending that after 30 years that billion pounds will be paid off I mean I understand it's part of an ecosystem but after 30 years no it's a 50 year payback period I mean it was 25 years I don't I don't want to flog a dead horse what happens this trust mini budget I can't remember which candidate you voted for but that caused us a huge change in our assumptions I mean for the again for the 70 years I was on the committee and we were constantly asking borrow borrow this is a good time to borrow because interest rates are low so we have had to factor that in instead of rolling back on the scheme we decided to extend the payback period so it's a long term investment in assets the council will own for 100 years we want these to be like housing estates that flipped 600 homes in the thousand homes program so that's 600 rents if you work that out it's quite a substantial sum every year coming over 50 years I'm not sure it does it's not in this paper I'm just doing some calculations now I'll come back to you on that but I think it does so okay any more questions I can't give the cabinet member that one for free Rachel Reeves double quick time so we're now way beyond Liz Trussle's figures in the mini budget it's now Rachel Reeves in the actual budget check the guilt market on your phone right now it's different from how it was last week okay any more questions no okay are we happy to take this paper recommendations A to K sorry I'm not I'll do it very quickly for Mr Kelly though so because it'll only be me so I'm abstaining on A and B against C against D against E against F abstaining on G against H abstaining on I against J and abstaining on K sorry against H abstaining on I and J sorry abstaining on I against J and abstaining on K yeah and we're okay we're uncomplicated okay brilliant okay thank you very much and so we will now move on to item 10 review and fees and charges and take Miss Burry again thank you thank you chair right so this is a relatively small paper on the fees and charges within housing the general overall council approach is to increase discretionary charges by 2.2% this paper covers charges for the home improvement agency the traveller site pitch fees and watch usually would include housing notices and houses of multiple occupation obviously there's an earlier paper on that the director of finance has commented that the overall income levels from these charges within this paper are minimal so they will be incorporated as part of an annual review of income levels as part of the development budget process I'll take any questions thank you any questions no okay so are we happy to hang on this there is so are we happy to support the recommendations on this we are everyone yeah okay brilliant okay fabulous so moving on to item number 11 which is a review of the heating and hot water account and revision of the charges of the 2005 26 financial year and it's Miss Burry again thank you oh it's Mr Stewart sorry this report concerns the management of the heat and hot water account and the setting of a charge 2025 26 there are currently 3686 properties currently served by a communal heating system with all but 246 covered by the heating and hot water account those 246 are covered by individual metering and billing arrangements that ensures that residents in those homes only pay for what they consume as members will be aware the global energy market has been extremely volatile this was reflected by the 270 increase in the charge for 2023 24 which still left the account in deficit a 10% increase in 2024 25 is likely to deliver a reduced deficit of around 65 I think it might be 650 thousand at the end of the current year spot purchasing energy through laser has delivered 44% reduction from October and it is recommended that a 20% reduction be made to charges for 2025 26 which should deliver a small surplus on the account by year end we will review the position again in the autumn those residents connected to a communal heating system benefit from the council's ability to spot purchase energy in bulk and on average will pay 25 percent less across the year happy to take any questions thank you any questions okay the the I think everyone around the table feels this is quite good news yeah okay so we're happy to support the recommendation yeah okay thank you very much well that's the end of the meeting yeah chair can I make a comment you can you can I have never been at a housing committee that's finished at 9 18 I think with such a bulky I've been at ones that's finished at midnight I think I think it's I think it's respect I think it's respect for your last meeting I think that's what it is everyone was on their best behavior and you know wanted to get the job done as quickly as possible we do have one announcement though please and I'll pass over to Councillor Dickerton I just wanted to let the committee know because there isn't another housing committee until it will have happened is that Brian Riley is retiring and you know obviously his presence you know he's not here tonight but you know Brian is both literally and kind of existentially a giant in housing and local government he has taught me so much I can't even begin and is a phenomenal officer who has the reason why we can do many of the things that we passed tonight is because of the careful stewardship of the HRA and the housing department and he leads a phenomenal team of amazing officers and he will be very much missed because you go to any conference and Brian is just a bigger than life figure and yeah good luck in his retirement may may I say on behalf of the residents as well can we pass on mind I will speak with Brian myself but could be you know for the rest of the meeting can we pass on on behalf of the residents thank you very much I knew Brian when he was an estate manager and he's worked his way up and he has been very helpful to me throughout the pass if I take a residence matter to him he sorted it thank you great okay on that I think we'll end the meeting but thank you very much for your attendance and thank you officers as well and thank you very much for all of the dedication to this committee

Transcript